Jippo

If the driver is unskilled he may still first turn rear enemy and driver forward, especially if it is a longer distance.

Good info, thanks. I see my memory was partially wrong. But at least we now know exactly and don't have to rely on my flimsy memories from years back.

On the T-54/55 turret which shows more significant damage there is no effect what so ever on the inside. HE rounds cause far less spalling than non-penetrating AP rounds. It's effect on armor is miniscule as the energy is directed to the sides and not towards the armor at all.

Yes, and the HE hit on the left side of the picture on the port. Port itself is fully intact.

Worth noting in that picture is also the fact that the fuse ignited the round immediately upon contact, i.e. it was not delayed. There is absolutely no damage at the actual impact point(where the fuse was when hit), and only cosmetic radial damage where the first shrapnel from the shell hit. When compared to the T-54/55 image posted earlier it is easy to see that the rounds there hadn't time to detonate properly and thus the shrapnel marks are not radial, but in a limited sector. Also there is circular crater where the shell front edge impacted the armor and caused some denting. I think we can conclude that in the latter case the shell/projectile was shattering when it (partially) detonated. Fusing was set to delayed action (i.e. optimum anti-armor performance), and it still didn't do **** to the turret. Bad, take your time proving your case.

Hmmmm.... I find it a good explanetion! I mean, recon is there just to do that.

That turret used to be behind our tank park in the armoured brigade, and ís these days located in the Finnish Armour Museum in Parola. There is a T-72M1 turret as well which has had similar treatment. If really interested I think they will give information about it. http://www.panssarimuseo.fi/kehys-e.html I don't remember the exact ammunition used on the turret, but there is a list there (that's why they have the numbers). Basically they shot everything in Finnish arsenal at that thing.

I wish we will see user made campaigns in teh future much like CC-series has. I have the same complaints about the campaign, as I think that a shorter timespan would be far more immersive. Short time with limited resupply would make troop "role playing part" in the units menu far more rewarding, and would encourage saving troops in missions also. Also there could be more variance with the difficulty of individual battles: do well on a mission, and the follow-up reflects your success as e.g. weak resistance. Maybe then next one after that could have enemy reinforcements pouring in again. This is definately something to look forward to from the community.

Friday was in Finland. So they are are still slowly coming around. Good luck for today for you!

In the target button there are three smaller crosshair icons on the right side, click them to make the tank aim in different places.

When I was in the army it took one to two hours to make a proper foxhole.

Yes, usually the person who makes the claim has the burden of proof. Number 5 is large caliber HE hit on T-54( or T-55, can't remember) turret side. IIRC it was 100mm HE. Penetration in this case is roughly 10mm, and fuse has been a delayed one.

But that is BS! Study first, then make claims.

Thanks for info!

Yep. Spalling and concussion through the armor wins a price. But they don't ki11 t3h cr3w. They may and kill and injure individual crew members, but to disable a tank crew? Rarely, and yes there are instances of that happening but the game has got it pretty much right as is. HE shouldn't be and isn't a tank (crew) killer.

How does heat kill the crew without penetrating? -heat? -pressure? -shockwave? -spalling? I don't think you know a great deal about these things, so this discussion is not very useful. I think we can say that for a computer game the effect is close enough in ToW, or not? I suggest that you will find some reference for HE effects on armor before continuing. I mean "HE was usefull vs tanks, not as good as AP vs thick armor, but vs med armor they were great ( from big caliber guns) " is not quite good enough.

The figures are more or less correct. It depends on fusing of the HE. With fuse set to sensitive he will only "wipe the dust" of the armor and will not penetrate. With delayed fuse heavy HE will penetrate light armor, not anything like T-34 though. HE design is pretty much the opposite to what is required for penetrating. They have low sectional mass and relatively low shell integrity with brittle steel and fuse in the nose. They are designed to shatter, not penetrate.

No they were not. HE is useless against armor.

Good old Tigerfibel: 227 AT-rifle hits 14 52mm AT gun hits 11 76,2mm AT gun hits drove over 3 AT mines Travelled 60km on it's own power to service.

I think you did really try. Unfortunately to no avail!

Assign a number key to selected bunch of soldiers by pressing [shift]+1, 2, 3, ... You can assign a number to any amount of men/tanks up to two squads of men. Then recall this group/selection just by pressing the number key. [ May 16, 2007, 05:26 AM: Message edited by: Jippo ]

I don't do it a lot, some people keep on commanding individual soldiers to get the results they like. How about adding (*.ini file or something) a set preference for a player profile for certain micromanagement attributes? I mean that each "commander" could give a certain set of preferences how their troops will conduct in the battle if not otherwise instructed. Basically it would mean that there would be some kind of interface for customizing your friendly AI. I mean one could set options like - "after reaching waypoint use initiative & move=yes/no" - "if fired upon go=prone/kneel/nothing" - "search enemy for grenades=yes/no" - "search enemy for grenades if closer than =10/20/50m" - "prefered ammo type against tanks=APCR/HEAT" - "infantry, open fire from = 50/100/150/200/300m" - "infantry open fire unless fired upon = yes/no" - etc... etc... And this kind of information would follow the player profile from engagement to another. Player could make adjustments in between battles, and his troops would adjust to his preferences. Thus player wouldn't need to worry about individual men in most cases, and friendly AI would be far more enjoyable. I think if it could be done it would add a whole new level into gameplay and tactics. People who don't like to micromanage everything could give a general set of prefered actions to get most out of their troops, and people who like to play with single soldiers could do so still. [ May 16, 2007, 02:16 AM: Message edited by: Jippo ]

Not dissing you, dissing discovery. And discovery or not, videos with guns are always cool.

There is the AK-107/108 models that have the counterweight system for reducing recoil, but the basic AK-103 they are fielding is more or less the old AKM with some rather minor improvements on it. Tried & true so to speak. http://world.guns.ru/assault/as05-e.htm Check it out ^

Russian army is starting to field new 100-series guns, in both 7,62x39 and 5.45 calibers. The actual "inferiority" or "superiority" of a cartridge depends on it's usage and required parametres.